[Julian658]

In every case?

Show me a culture where a minority was dominant. We evolved in tribes. 99% of our existence as humans in the planet was spent with small groups that had a LOT of kinship.


[/quote]But you do agree that you have created a Catch-22 situation for immigrants here?[/quote]

Absolutely! Give to the Cesar what the Cesar deserves. Republicans want cheap labor. Dems want voters. The native local middle class gets the shaft. What else is new.


POD, I suggest you listen to Jonathan Haidt. He was once a lefty like you and then realize nations needs both the left and the right to have any success. You need to get out of the echo chamber.

[Pants-of-dog]

Show me a culture where a minority was dominant.

Apartheid South Africa.

The Belgian Congo.

Hawaii under English and then US rule.

Rich people ruling over poor people.

The list goes on and on.

So no, the majority does not dominate. It is not like non-whites are immediately going to create a multi-ethnic but anti-white fascist nation the moment they are 50%+1 of the population.

Absolutely! Give to the Cesar what the Cesar deserves. Republicans want cheap labor. Dems want voters. The native local middle class gets the shaft. What else is new.


POD, I suggest you listen to Jonathan Haidt. He was once a lefty like you and then realize nations needs both the left and the right to have any success. You need to get out of the echo chamber.

I think you did not understand my question.

Your positions are these: immigrants should not have jobs, and immigrants should not receive assistance.

This means that the only immigrants that are not bad, in your opinion, are independently wealthy ones.

So, you will end up condemning the vast majority of immigrants no matter what they do.

[Julian658]

Apartheid South Africa.

The Belgian Congo.

Hawaii under English and then US rule.

Rich people ruling over poor people.

The list goes on and on.

So no, the majority does not dominate. It is not like non-whites are immediately going to create a multi-ethnic but anti-white fascist nation the moment they are 50%+1 of the population.

I thought you would bring that up. But, that is a totally different scenario. That is how all repressive dictatorships operate. I am talking about a society where one ethnic group is the clear minority.

I think you did not understand my question.

Your positions are these: immigrants should not have jobs, and immigrants should not receive assistance.

This means that the only immigrants that are not bad, in your opinion, are independently wealthy ones.

So, you will end up condemning the vast majority of immigrants no matter what they do.

If there is a job available they should come. Most nations favor migration for skilled workers they need. Poor unskilled people do not get in unless they come in as refugees. However, quite often there is a need even for unskilled workers. Old people are generally not accepted as they generally become very expensive for the state as they get older. However, the USA has a system where once a family member migrates he or she brings in the old grandparents. I see a ton of foreigners in their 80s that recently arrived to America receiving health care. I don't think Canada puts up with that. I could be wrong.

[Pants-of-dog]

I thought you would bring that up. But, that is a totally different scenario. That is how all repressive dictatorships operate. I am talking about a society where one ethnic group is the clear minority.

So, you are now saying that minorities sometimes oppress majorities, and that majorities sometimes oppress minorities.

Are there any times when no one is being oppressed?

If there is a job available they should come. Most nations favor migration for skilled workers they need. Poor unskilled people do not get in unless they come in as refugees. However, quite often there is a need even for unskilled workers. Old people are generally not accepted as they generally become very expensive for the state as they get older. However, the USA has a system where once a family member migrates he or she brings in the old grandparents. I see a ton of foreigners in their 80s that recently arrived to America receiving health care. I don't think Canada puts up with that. I could be wrong.

Do you know what a Catch-22 situation is?

[Julian658]

So, you are now saying that minorities sometimes oppress majorities, and that majorities sometimes oppress minorities.

Are there any times when no one is being oppressed?



Do you know what a Catch-22 situation is?

Tovarish POD: The problem is that people like you always compare the current situation to an utopia. I get that utopia is the last stage of communism and you likely dream about it every night. I have good news for you! That utopia will be a reality in about 1000 years or so. Capitalism will create so much wealth that wealth will be redundant and will be freely given to all. Sadly the world will still be divided in "have " and "have not. Do you know why? Do you know what happens to humans when they get everything for free?

[Potemkin]

Do you know what happens to humans when they get everything for free?

No, I don't know. Do they turn into this guy...?

[Julian658]

No, I don't know. Do they turn into this guy...?

LOL, That is not a bad example. Others include homeless bums, drug addicts, nihilist dudes, etc,

[Rich]

No, I don't know. Do they turn into this guy...?

I've been an unwavering Republican as long as I've been politically conscious. However Andrew didn't choose to be Royal. He didn't choose to be Prince of York. He might not be needed now but, when he was born there was a significant chance that he could end up as King like his Grand Father. He fought for this country in the Falklands war. I seem to remember that a number of the helicopter pilots paid the ultimate sacrifice. He served 22 years in the Royal Navy. With the birth of Prince William and his retirement he was no longer needed for this absurd monarchist system, but that's not his fault. What was he meant do, retrain as a plumber

Royalists who whine on about his behaviour should be treated with contempt. if we must have Royals, the least I ask of them is not to lecture us on equality or the environment. If we're going to keep the Royals but want to cut down on their carbon foot print I say keep Andrew but lets boot out Green Peace Charlie and Dutchess Megan of Extinction.

[SpecialOlympian]

James:

Here is the data for 2018 from the Washington Post, a very woke SJW, black lives matter newspaper:
More whites than blacks are killed by cops


Now you will say that blacks are the minority. Yes they are, but they do the majority of violent and hence have MUCH more contact with police.
OTOH, it will be a rarity if an Asian gets shot by cop. You know why? They do very little crime.

It's almost like enslaving a people, then enacting legal measures to systematically destroy the wealth they accumulated while simultaneously creating a judicial system prejudiced against them has effects.

You know what you're saying is bullshit and you're dodging the argument by pointing to raw numbers.

Also my name isn't James you weirdo. Who the fuck are you cyber stalking?

[Pants-of-dog]

Tovarish POD: The problem is that people like you always compare the current situation to an utopia. I get that utopia is the last stage of communism and you likely dream about it every night. I have good news for you! That utopia will be a reality in about 1000 years or so. Capitalism will create so much wealth that wealth will be redundant and will be freely given to all. Sadly the world will still be divided in "have " and "have not. Do you know why? Do you know what happens to humans when they get everything for free?

I neither said nor implied anything about utopias.

You seem to ignore what people actually write and simply wait until your turn and then say the next thing you feel like saying, despite the fact that it has nothing to do with what people are talking about.

Since that is the case, I doubt this will be productive for me.

Have a good one.

[Julian658]

I neither said nor implied anything about utopias.

You seem to ignore what people actually write and simply wait until your turn and then say the next thing you feel like saying, despite the fact that it has nothing to do with what people are talking about.

Since that is the case, I doubt this will be productive for me.

Have a good one.

Comrade POD: I have been very kind with my words when I post to you. However, unknowingly I must have touched a subject that makes you uncomfortable. If I said something that offended you I apologize.

[Julian658]

It's almost like enslaving a people, then enacting legal measures to systematically destroy the wealth they accumulated while simultaneously creating a judicial system prejudiced against them has effects.

You know what you're saying is bullshit and you're dodging the argument by pointing to raw numbers.

Also my name isn't James you weirdo. Who the fuck are you cyber stalking?

I have to remind you that facts do not care about feelings. It is sad to see that 6% of the population (black men) commit 52% of the murders. Nevertheless, the white cops shoot more white people than black people. Live with that and move on.

[Pants-of-dog]

When a person makes a racist argument by posting statistics like “black men commit 52% of the murders and only comprise 6% of the population”, they are being misleading.

This type of raw data does not take into account many factors, and the only factors that the racist person contributes is race. This absence of other factors implies that the reason for the disparity is due to race.

The racist argument does not, for example, take into account age, or racism of police and the justice system, or poverty, or even how much lead is in the water.

[Julian658]

When a person makes a racist argument by posting statistics like “black men commit 52% of the murders and only comprise 6% of the population”, they are being misleading.

This type of raw data does not take into account many factors, and the only factors that the racist person contributes is race. This absence of other factors implies that the reason for the disparity is due to race.

The racist argument does not, for example, take into account age, or racism of police and the justice system, or poverty, or even how much lead is in the water.

Compañero POD: I have no interest in exchanging insults or winning or losing an argument. Facts are facts! And you are correct, many other factors cause young black males to do crime. In any event try to be a bit more professional with your arguments.

[Pants-of-dog]

And since these other factors are significant, and yet unaddressed, this statistic all by itself is misleading.

Not only does it lay the blame entirely on black people because of the colour of their skin, but it helps people ignore the real causes of crime that negatively impact everyone.

[Drlee]

The racist argument does not, for example, take into account age, or racism of police and the justice system, or poverty, or even how much lead is in the water.

Let me call a Waambulance. The statistic is simply what it is. Should we look into why? Absolutely. I would point out a couple of things you posted.

Racism of police has nothing to do with blacks killing blacks which is the lion's share of the problem. Neither does the justice system.

Poverty? Absolutely. So what is your solution? Obviously the solution is redistribution of wealth. So how much and where? And if you give someone money, for example to the schools they attend, then what is their personal responsibility?

Lead in the water? Really. Even you can't tie the crime rate to lead in the water unless....wait for it.....you want to get into a discussion of how much lower IQs are in people who have been exposed to lead in the water and what effect that has on propensity to commit crimes. Do you really want to go into the whole IQ thing?

I see that you have deliberately ignored several things. How about the effect of absentee fathers? How about the effect of a multi-generational disposition to criminal enterprise? How about the effect of "gangster culture".

But let's ask the hard questions. I would like to hear you posit a solution of your own. Actually take a position not post someone else's shit.

How would you improve predominately black schools?

How would you motivate the kids in these schools to avail themselves of these new opportunities?

In a world of diminishing high paid work for all how would you insert poor and ghetto kids into it?

What would you do to reform the criminal justice system?

How do you get white people to hire black people for upwardly mobile career tracks?

I would like to hear some actual solutions from the left rather than just pointing fingers and alibiing bad behavior.



There is not one chance in hell that you will actually take the time to answer these issues @Pants-of-dog

[Julian658]

Let me call a Waambulance. The statistic is simply what it is. Should we look into why? Absolutely. I would point out a couple of things you posted.

Racism of police has nothing to do with blacks killing blacks which is the lion's share of the problem. Neither does the justice system.

Poverty? Absolutely. So what is your solution? Obviously the solution is redistribution of wealth. So how much and where? And if you give someone money, for example to the schools they attend, then what is their personal responsibility?

Lead in the water? Really. Even you can't tie the crime rate to lead in the water unless....wait for it.....you want to get into a discussion of how much lower IQs are in people who have been exposed to lead in the water and what effect that has on propensity to commit crimes. Do you really want to go into the whole IQ thing?

I see that you have deliberately ignored several things. How about the effect of absentee fathers? How about the effect of a multi-generational disposition to criminal enterprise? How about the effect of "gangster culture".

But let's ask the hard questions. I would like to hear you posit a solution of your own. Actually take a position not post someone else's shit.

How would you improve predominately black schools?

How would you motivate the kids in these schools to avail themselves of these new opportunities?

In a world of diminishing high paid work for all how would you insert poor and ghetto kids into it?

What would you do to reform the criminal justice system?

How do you get white people to hire black people for upwardly mobile career tracks?

I would like to hear some actual solutions from the left rather than just pointing fingers and alibiing bad behavior.



There is not one chance in hell that you will actually take the time to answer these issues @Pants-of-dog

DrLee, you are been cruel to comrade POD.


Truthfully, the problem is incredibly difficult to solve and the proposals from the left have not worked. They even tried the most expensive school system in the world in Kansas City in the 1990s and nothing came of that.

I would try to teach ethics in school 1-2 hours a day from grade 1-12 and hope for the best. I would also create military type schools with uniforms. I would separate the wheat from the chaff and try to save some rather than none. It is a dystopian world of epic proportions .

[annatar1914]

DrLee, you are been cruel to comrade POD.


Truthfully, the problem is incredibly difficult to solve and the proposals from the left have not worked. They even tried the most expensive school system in the world in Kansas City in the 1990s and nothing came of that.

I would try to teach ethics in school 1-2 hours a day from grade 1-12 and hope for the best. I would also create military type schools with uniforms. I would separate the wheat from the chaff and try to save some rather than none. It is a dystopian world of epic proportions .

One thing I would do besides uniforms is separate the genders. Time goes on kids are more interested in the sexual dynamic than in their studies and improving themselves.

[Pants-of-dog]

Let me call a Waambulance. The statistic is simply what it is. Should we look into why? Absolutely. I would point out a couple of things you posted.

Racism of police has nothing to do with blacks killing blacks which is the lion's share of the problem. Neither does the justice system.

Sure it does.

Because of racism by police, there would be a reluctance to investigate murders where the victims are black, or devote the same resources as the police would if the victim were white. This would then contribute to the logical idea that it is easier to get away with a crime if the victim were black.

Poverty? Absolutely. So what is your solution? Obviously the solution is redistribution of wealth. So how much and where?

All of it. Everywhere.

And if you give someone money, for example to the schools they attend, then what is their personal responsibility?

To me, personal responsibility is not relevant to a discussion about how statistics are misleadingly represented and end up as racist arguments.

Lead in the water? Really. Even you can't tie the crime rate to lead in the water unless....wait for it.....you want to get into a discussion of how much lower IQs are in people who have been exposed to lead in the water and what effect that has on propensity to commit crimes. Do you really want to go into the whole IQ thing?

https://www.motherjones.com/environment ... en-health/

In 1994, Rick Nevin was a consultant working for the US Department of Housing and Urban Development on the costs and benefits of removing lead paint from old houses. This has been a topic of intense study because of the growing body of research linking lead exposure in small children with a whole raft of complications later in life, including lower IQ, hyperactivity, behavioral problems, and learning disabilities.

But as Nevin was working on that assignment, his client suggested they might be missing something. A recent study had suggested a link between childhood lead exposure and juvenile delinquency later on. Maybe reducing lead exposure had an effect on violent crime too?

That tip took Nevin in a different direction. The biggest source of lead in the postwar era, it turns out, wasn’t paint. It was leaded gasoline. And if you chart the rise and fall of atmospheric lead caused by the rise and fall of leaded gasoline consumption, you get a pretty simple upside-down U: Lead emissions from tailpipes rose steadily from the early ’40s through the early ’70s, nearly quadrupling over that period. Then, as unleaded gasoline began to replace leaded gasoline, emissions plummeted.

Intriguingly, violent crime rates followed the same upside-down U pattern. The only thing different was the time period: Crime rates rose dramatically in the ’60s through the ’80s, and then began dropping steadily starting in the early ’90s. The two curves looked eerily identical, but were offset by about 20 years.

So Nevin dove in further, digging up detailed data on lead emissions and crime rates to see if the similarity of the curves was as good as it seemed. It turned out to be even better: In a 2000 paper (PDF) he concluded that if you add a lag time of 23 years, lead emissions from automobiles explain 90 percent of the variation in violent crime in America. Toddlers who ingested high levels of lead in the ’40s and ’50s really were more likely to become violent criminals in the ’60s, ’70s, and ’80s.

And with that we have our molecule: tetraethyl lead, the gasoline additive invented by General Motors in the 1920s to prevent knocking and pinging in high-performance engines. As auto sales boomed after World War II, and drivers in powerful new cars increasingly asked service station attendants to “fill ‘er up with ethyl,” they were unwittingly creating a crime wave two decades later.

It was an exciting conjecture, and it prompted an immediate wave of…nothing. Nevin’s paper was almost completely ignored, and in one sense it’s easy to see why—Nevin is an economist, not a criminologist, and his paper was published in Environmental Research, not a journal with a big readership in the criminology community. What’s more, a single correlation between two curves isn’t all that impressive, econometrically speaking. Sales of vinyl LPs rose in the postwar period too, and then declined in the ’80s and ’90s. Lots of things follow a pattern like that. So no matter how good the fit, if you only have a single correlation it might just be a coincidence. You need to do something more to establish causality.

As it turns out, however, a few hundred miles north someone was doing just that. In the late ’90s, Jessica Wolpaw Reyes was a graduate student at Harvard casting around for a dissertation topic that eventually became a study she published in 2007 as a public health policy professor at Amherst. “I learned about lead because I was pregnant and living in old housing in Harvard Square,” she told me, and after attending a talk where future Freakonomics star Levitt outlined his abortion/crime theory, she started thinking about lead and crime. Although the association seemed plausible, she wanted to find out whether increased lead exposure caused increases in crime. But how?

The answer, it turned out, involved “several months of cold calling” to find lead emissions data at the state level. During the ’70s and ’80s, the introduction of the catalytic converter, combined with increasingly stringent Environmental Protection Agency rules, steadily reduced the amount of leaded gasoline used in America, but Reyes discovered that this reduction wasn’t uniform. In fact, use of leaded gasoline varied widely among states, and this gave Reyes the opening she needed. If childhood lead exposure really did produce criminal behavior in adults, you’d expect that in states where consumption of leaded gasoline declined slowly, crime would decline slowly too. Conversely, in states where it declined quickly, crime would decline quickly. And that’s exactly what she found.

Meanwhile, Nevin had kept busy as well, and in 2007 he published a new paper looking at crime trends around the world (PDF). This way, he could make sure the close match he’d found between the lead curve and the crime curve wasn’t just a coincidence. Sure, maybe the real culprit in the United States was something else happening at the exact same time, but what are the odds of that same something happening at several different times in several different countries?

Nevin collected lead data and crime data for Australia and found a close match. Ditto for Canada. And Great Britain and Finland and France and Italy and New Zealand and West Germany. Every time, the two curves fit each other astonishingly well. When I spoke to Nevin about this, I asked him if he had ever found a country that didn’t fit the theory. “No,” he replied. “Not one.”

Just this year, Tulane University researcher Howard Mielke published a paper with demographer Sammy Zahran on the correlation of lead and crime at the city level. They studied six US cities that had both good crime data and good lead data going back to the ’50s, and they found a good fit in every single one. In fact, Mielke has even studied lead concentrations at the neighborhood level in New Orleans and shared his maps with the local police. “When they overlay them with crime maps,” he told me, “they realize they match up.”

....

The many studies mentioned are linked in the article.

I can provide the links too, if you wish.

I see that you have deliberately ignored several things. How about the effect of absentee fathers? How about the effect of a multi-generational disposition to criminal enterprise? How about the effect of "gangster culture".

But let's ask the hard questions. I would like to hear you posit a solution of your own. Actually take a position not post someone else's shit.

How would you improve predominately black schools?

I would pay teachers what they were actually worth, and attract the best and the brightest. I would work with people who are already doing exactly that and get their insights.

How would you motivate the kids in these schools to avail themselves of these new opportunities?

I do not think that kids these days are deliberately ignoring opportunities, so this is probably not actually a problem.

In a world of diminishing high paid work for all how would you insert poor and ghetto kids into it?

What would you do to reform the criminal justice system?

How do you get white people to hire black people for upwardly mobile career tracks?

I would like to hear some actual solutions from the left rather than just pointing fingers and alibiing bad behavior.

You do realise that I am a radical Marxist and if I could, the US and capitalism would not even exist any more?

And I know that you would like to change the subject from misleading racist arguments and instead discuss how centre right liberals want to slightly modify capitalism as opposed to how right wing liberals want to maintain it as is. But I am not discussing that. I am discussing how this statistic is misleading and used to justify racism.

There is not one chance in hell that you will actually take the time to answer these issues @Pants-of-dog

You figured out how to use the usermention thing.

Do you want me to explain how these questions are irrelevant from my anti-colonial marxist position?

Or do you want me to explain what a typical US capitalist with progressive tendencies would answer these questions?

[Rich]

Because of racism by police, there would be a reluctance to investigate murders where the victims are black, or devote the same resources as the police would if the victim were white. This would then contribute to the logical idea that it is easier to get away with a crime if the victim were black.

I love the way Cultural Marxists just think we born yesterday. Only about 8.6% of Black murder victims are killed by Whites. If the murder of a Black victim is not investigated, its a win for Liberals as it probably avoids adding an extra count to the Black perpetrator murder count. Its amazing how well the left have insulated themselves from reality. Many of them really do seem to believe in this White supremacist racism nonsense.

Jews, Chinese, Japanese, Koreans have all been the victims of severe racism in the US in the past, but none of these communities seem to feel the meed to run around murdering people at the rates that Blacks do.

The White supremacist racist lie is self sustaining. Though out the education system and increasingly within the big corporate world, massive efforts going into biasing the system against Whites and in favour of Blacks. Massive efforts go into overcoming the performance superiority of Whites. This means that you end up with large numbers of Blacks who are just not competent for their job positions. Inevitably at some point many of these incompetent diversity people get passed over for a promotion. Of course inevitably the Cultural Marxists will pick this up in the statistics. This will be yet further confirmation of White Supremacism, requiring yet more diversity, yet more affirmative action. This is what a Leftie would call a virtuous circle.

Remember when a Jew succeeds its because he is more intelligent and hard working than a Gentile. When a White person succeeds its because he's an evil racist supremacist. Marxists like Medieval Christian Theologians are not frightened by contradiction. They thrive on it.

And a Cultural Marxist like a medieval Christian will feel guilty if he starts to doubt the contradictory and absurdist dogmas of his religion. That guilt about doubting then becomes proof of the thought-system. As for a Christian, doubt about the pervasive and incontestable nature of original sin is itself a sin. So for a cultural Marxist doubting the pervasive and incontestable nature of white Supremacism is itself a form of White Supremacism. I mean what more proof of the massive level of White Supremacism do you need than the fact that people deny the existence of massive levels of White Supremacism.